Spotts

This action is in ejectment for certain lots of land in blocks 11 and 12, lying in that portion of the city and county of San Francisco called the Potrero Huevo.

The defendants had judgment rendered in their favor by the court, which tried the action without the intervention of a jury. The appeal here prosecuted is from an order refusing to set aside that judgment and grant a new trial.

The appellants seem to rely mainly for a reversal of the order upon three grounds: 1. The evidence was insufficient to warrant certain of the findings; 2. That the court failed to find upon a material issue raised by the pleadings; 3. That the court committed error in overruling “the plaintiff’s objections to the judgment roll,—Plate v. Taggart being received in evidence, and in admitting the same in evidence.”

The plaintiff claims title in his intestate, Dyson, derived from one George Treat, who, he maintains, was, in the year 1850, and fur some time thereafter, in the actual possession of the whole of the Potrero Huevo, which is a peninsula containing about eleven hundred acres of land, bounded on three of its sides by Mission Creek, the bay of San Francisco, and Precita Creek, and the marshes…